U.K. "Dunblane dad tells of banned gun fears"

[Dogsoldier]

I knew that my post would probably start a firestrom. Bruce, if I offended you, please accept my apology. The point is, Aus, Canada and England have a respresentational form of government. The people can control who sits as a MP, they are not annointed by God. Have your PM's paid a heavy political toll for the gun ban? Have the people voted these clowns out? Did the people put more gun friendly MPs in office?

Probably not. We have the same problem here in the states. Only a small portion of gunowners will actually get off their rears and vote. We did have a shake up in the last election, but I do not know how that will last. The will of the people will be followed if there is a political ramification attached to it. Unfortunatly, your countrymen and thos of Canada and GB have decided to lay back and let the government do for them. There is where your problem lays. The people of Canada, GB and your country need to start agitating the political system. You say that you have no right to firearms in Australia, I would say take them. If the political will was there in your country, it would happen.

I will not relieve myself or my fellow Americans from the same criticism. We are moving towards the nanny state. It maybe slower, but it is happening. Some of us are fighting the best we can, but most, even the gun owners are not being all that active. So when and if there is a handgun ban in the USA, I will say the same thing about my countrymen as I did to you. And no, I will be one of those weirdos who will fight the confiscation in the courts until I'm broke. And then I will find other ways to defend the Constitution. God forbid it coming to that.

 

[Bruce in West Oz]

Bruce, if I offended you, please accept my apology.

No need for an apology, mate -- it was just that I've heard/read that same comment so many times .... I truly didn't mean to be taken personally; I just get a trifle heated over this ...

Have your PM's paid a heavy political toll for the gun ban? Have the people voted these clowns out? Did the people put more gun friendly MPs in office?

I wish!

When the 1996 gun laws were rammed through (in just days), as far as I know there was not even one dissenting vote -- the Opposition joined the government willingly! (There may have been an independent or two who voted nay, but I wouldn't count on it.) Now, under the Constitution, the Feds have no control over firearms; it is purely a State matter. So, our PM simply withheld Federal funding until the States agreed to comply with his new laws/wish list. Apparently that's only blackmail when you or I do it.

Generally speaking, the "main" political parties here are:

Liberal Party (right wing) = they're the ones who brought in the new laws -- and are now banning classes of handguns based on ccalibre and barrel length.

Labor Party (left wing; yes spelling is correct) = traditionally anti-gun; their platform calles for "strict" control of firearms.

Democrats (left wingnuts) = ban on firearms being held in homes; all to be kept in armouries; progressive disarmament of civilians, military and police forces.

Greens (left wingnuts) = total prohibition on civilian firearms ownership.

So, who do we vote for??

There IS a great pro-gun politician -- John Tingle -- in office in New South Wales; but sadly he's a State pollie and not a Fed. And shooters couldn't get their act together enough to even make sure he won comfortably! (And don't forget we have compulsory voting!) We ARE our own worst enemies.

fallingblock

I really believe that mass non-compliance of Howard's gun laws
with thousands of arrests/trials would have resulted in a government backdown.

That's your opinion and I respect it. I think there would have simply been a change to the legislation (using Howard's "leverage" system) that would have resulted in no need for arrest or trial, just an automatic penalty for non-compliance -- perhaps as little as suspension of driver's licence and loss of passport without compliance up to something like they so gaily do with "bikie gangs" -- total State confiscation of all your assets (house, land, car, business, boat) until you prove you complied. Who in parliament would vote against it?

have we really sunken to the point of cowering before a government no matter what they do to us?

Not yet -- but as you well know, under our government system, parliament is supreme, and the law is the law is the law ... Out of the 200 or so gun owners I know now, if it came to the line in the sand, I can only think of half a dozen who would "man the barricades", speaking metaphorically. The rest would bitch, whinge, whine -- then shrug their shoulders, hand over their guns and go home for a beer and watch the footy on TV.

So...do we refuse to commit and live happily ever after in the resulting gulag?

For now?? I don't see an option ... yet. But things do change, all the time.

wondernine

Hahahahahahahahaha!!!!!

That's very funny....

You think so? I hope you never have to find out. If you think all, say, people who hunt casually once a year or so, or are strictly clay target shooters, or people who shoot handguns only for target competition, or those who are gun owners but only have a "wall hanger" or a rusty old hand-me-down in a shed or cupboard are going to stand on their back feet and resist to the extent you will ... well, I'm sorry, but I think you'll be disillusioned and disappointed very quickly. We have been.

BTW, yes, knives are "offensive weapons" here, too. It is illegal to carry even a pocketknife without satisfying the requirement of "reason". That is, if you are a farmer at work with a pocketknife in a leather pouch on your belt -- no problem. If you are walking down the main street of Sydeny wearing a pocketknife in a leather pouch on your belt, the police will want to know why -- and you could (could, not would) be charged with carrying an offensive weapon.

Incidentally, "prohibited weapons" are not just firearms. Here, for example, is the list from New South Wales:

Some examples of Prohibited Weapons

(This Act does not impact on firearms)
* denotes the four additions to the Prohibited Weapons Act

Miscellaneous Weapons:

*Missile launchers: any device that is designed to propel or launch a bomb, grenade, rocket or missile by any means other than an explosive.

Bomb, grenade, rocket, missile or mine: or any similar device which expels or contains an explosive, incendiary, irritant or gas.

Flame thrower: that is of military design or any other device that is capable of projecting ignited incendiary fuel.

Crossbow: or any similar device consisting of a bow fitted transversely on a stock that has a groove or barrel designed to direct an arrow or bolt.

Sling shot a device consisting of an elasticised band secured to the forks of a Y shaped frame other than a home made sling shot for use by a child in the course of play.

Mace: or any other similar article that consists of a club or staff fitted with a flanged or spiked head, other than a ceremonial mace made for and used solely as a symbol of authority on ceremonial occasions.

Flail: or any other similar article that consists of a staff or handle that has fitted to one end, by any means, a freely swinging striking part that is armed with spikes or studded with any protruding matter.

Whip: that has a lash which is comprised wholly or partly of any form of metal.

Cat-o’-nine tails: or any other whip that consists of a handle to which there is attached any number of knotted lashes.

King fu sticks or ‘nunchaku’: or any other article consisting of two or more sticks or bars made of any material that are joined together by any means that allows the sticks or bars to swing independently of each other.

Side-handled baton: or any other article consisting of a baton, staff or rod that is made of any hard substance and has fitted to one side a handle, whether or not that handle is permanently fixed.

Knuckle-dusters: or any other similar article that is made of any hard substance and that can be fitted over the knuckles of the hand of the user to protect.

Taser Self-Defence Weapon: Any hand-held device that is designed to administer an electric shock on contact, such as the Taser Self-Defence Weapon or an electrified brief-case, but do not include any such hand-held device that may lawfully be used on an animal in accordance with the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1979.

*Extendable or Telescopic Baton: or any article consisting of a baton, staff or rod that is made of any hard substance and has fitted to one side a handle, whether or not that handle is permanently fixed.

*Devices designed to stun or disorient people by emitting noise and light:
(known as sound & flash grenades) any acoustic or light emitting anti-personal device that is designed to cause permanent or temporary incapacity or to otherwise disorientate persons.


Miscellaneous articles:

Body armour vests: or other similar articles designed for anti-ballistic purposes and to be worn on any part of the body (other than helmets or anti-ballistic articles used for eye or hearing protection).

Handcuffs: (other than antique handcuffs, or children’s toy handcuffs that are of an approved type).

Silencers: or any other device designed for attachment to a firearm for the purpose of muffling, reducing or stopping the noise created by firing the firearm.

Replicas, imitations, concealed blades:

Walking stick or cane: that contains a sword or any other single-edged or multi-edged blade or spike of any length or of any material.

Riding crop: that contains a knife, stiletto or any other single-edged or multi-edged blade or spike of any length or material.

Bowen Knife Belt: or any other similar article consisting of a belt or buckle that conceals or disguises within the article a knife or a single-edged or multi-edged blade or spike of any length or of any material.

Concealed knives: any article or device that:

a) due to its appearance is capable of being mistaken for something else that is not a weapon, and

b) disguises and conceals within it a single-edged or multi-edged blade or spike of any length or of any material.

Replica or imitation firearms: an imitation of any firearm which requires a licence or permit under the Firearms Act, unless approved by the Commissioner of Police.

Imitation or replica of a bomb, grenade, rocket, missile or mine: unless approved by the Commissioner of Police.


Knives:

Flick knife: (or other similar device) a blade which opens automatically by gravity or centrifugal force or by any pressure applied to a button, spring or device in or attached to the handle of the knife.

*Ballistic knife: a knife that propels a knife-like blade of any material by any means other than an explosive.

Sheath knife: a knife which has a sheath which withdraws into its handle by gravity or centrifugal force or if pressure is applied to a button, spring or device attached to or forming part of the sheath, handle or blade of the knife.

Urban Skinner push dagger: or any other device that consists of a single-edged or multi-edged blade or spike that has a handle fitted transversely to the blade or spike and allows the blade or spike to be supported by the palm of the hand so that stabbing blows or slashes can be inflicted by a punching or pushing action.

Trench knife: or any other device that consists of a single-edged or multi-edged blade or spike that is fitted with a handle made of any hard substance that can be fitted over the knuckles of the hand of the user to protect the knuckles and increase the effect of a punch or blow, or that is adapted for such use.

Butterfly knife or ‘balisong’: _or any other device that consists of a single-edged or multi-edged blade or spike that fits within two handles attached to the blade or spike by transverse pivot pins and is capable of being opened by gravity or centrifugal force.

Star knife: or any other device that consists of a number of angular points, blades or spikes disposed outwardly about a central axis point and that are designed to spin around the central axis point in flight when thrown at a target.
...

tough penalties will be imposed for the unlawful possession of prohibited weapons with a maximum penalty of:

$11,000 and up to 14 years imprisonment.

Not bad, huh?

Bruce

 

[fallingblock]

Appreciate the reply, Bruce...

I was in Queensland when the 1996 laws hit, and I believe that Liz Cunningham, Independent for Gladstone, was the only dissenting vote. For all his bluster, even Bob Katter went with the Nats. Not much political spine even from our 'allies', eh?


Quote:
"That's your opinion and I respect it."
****************************************************
And I respect yours as well. You've been here in Oz fighting this sort of thing for a lot longer than I have...especially with the head start that W.A. got with draconian firearms laws. I understand the feeling of betrayal and resignation which has set in among Australian shooters...we've lost several pistol shooters from the SSAA here in Alice over this latest bit of foolishness, er, 'tough new handgun laws'.


Quote:
"I think there would have simply been a change to the legislation (using Howard's "leverage" system) that would have resulted in no need for arrest or trial, just an automatic penalty for non-compliance -- perhaps as little as suspension of driver's licence and loss of passport without compliance up to something like they so gaily do with "bikie gangs" -- total State confiscation of all your assets (house, land, car, business, boat) until you prove you complied. Who in parliament would vote against it?"
****************************************************

Perhaps. Certainly there are few politicians in the Australian system who will go out on a limb for shooters.
But, I do think that the perceived injustice resulting from a large-scale organised non-compliance by firearms owners would have shifted public opinion.
Despite the P.C. anti-gun folk's propaganda I don't think most Australians actually despise shooters or fear their presence in the community.
We needed to make our case reasonably and forcefully at the time but of course were denied access by the media and by the Howard government's rush to implement the legislation.
'Blind-sided', as it were. Leaving us the options of surrender or disobedience.


Quote:
Not yet -- but as you well know, under our government system, parliament is supreme, and the law is the law is the law ... Out of the 200 or so gun owners I know now, if it came to the line in the sand, I can only think of half a dozen who would "man the barricades", speaking metaphorically. The rest would bitch, whinge, whine -- then shrug their shoulders, hand over their guns and go home for a beer and watch the footy on TV.
****************************************************

Yes, the concept of Parliamentary supremacy is one of those crippling legacies we got from the British.

We surely would benefit from a proper Bill of Rights such as the U.S. has. As it stands, no individual 'right' exists unless Parliament sanctions it. Exactly the wrong way around for the concept of individual rights to flourish...or even exist!

I admire the half dozen or so of those gun-owning mates of yours who'd resist. You are correct that the vast majority of gun owners will just wander off and take up fishing when the final crunch comes.

The RKBA as an individual right is perhaps alien to the Australian identity...not much point in attempting massive cultural change within an unreceptive population, is there?

Maybe things here could change...but I have difficulty seeing how that could happen without more resistance from the gun-owning victims of government abuse...

 

[fallingblock]

Dogsoldier.....

You are correct:

"We have the same problem here in the states. Only a small portion of gunowners will actually get off their rears and vote.
We did have a shake up in the last election, but I do not know how that will last."
****************************************************
I am a U.S. citizen also and I voted for G.W.B. in the state of Florida....we squeaked by with 538 votes there and kept that anti-gun lunatic Gore out of the Whitehouse, but it was just too durn close to assume we can do it again.


"The will of the people will be followed if there is a political ramification attached to it."
****************************************************
The Australian electoral system makes it infinitely harder for a block of determined voters to make a difference.

First- voting is mandatory here...if you do not vote you are tracked down and asked why, and if you do not have a 'good' excuse, you are fined.

Second- there is a system of preferrential assignment of votes cast. When you vote, you must list the candidates (yes, even the ones you do not like) in descending order of preference. If your first choice does not win, your vote goes on to the next one on the list...with all sorts of 'deals' cut by the parties as to whom they will direct their preferences.

Third- unlike the U.S., we do not elect the executive, the party with Parliamentary majority does. So, even if a sympathetic potential leader chose to support gun ownership, for example, his party could (and likely would here) ignore him/her and choose
someone who will run with the sheep.

" Unfortunatly, your countrymen and thos of Canada and GB have decided to lay back and let the government do for them. There is where your problem lays."
****************************************************

We have the very same problem with a large segment of the U.S. population, as you know. Here in Australia, the "let the government do it for me" crowd all have to vote-I suspect a lot of that same crowd in the U.S. just stays home on election day....


" You say that you have no right to firearms in Australia, I would say take them. If the political will was there in your country, it would happen."
****************************************************

Well, Dogsoldier....some other Australian folks say that we have no right to firearms here; I would disagree

To be precise, the Australian government does not RECOGNISE
our right to keep and bear arms.

Will the gunowners of Australia ever have the strength of numbers or resolve to take back their rights?

Sadly, No...I don't think that is likely to happen

But U.S. firearms-owners should certainly take Australia's (and Canada's and the U.K.'s) example to heart:

Any conciliatory approach which attempts to retain firearms for 'sporting purposes' is doomed to fail. One by one, those 'sporting purposes' will be eliminated in the name of a 'safer society' or social utility until there are no more privately-owned firearms. Support the Second Amendment and make sure it's meaning is understood.
It ain't about hunting or target shooting!

 

[c_yeager]

Didnt the BATF very recently round up a bunch of legally purchased parts kits? Like several thousand all told. It doesnt seem that any of those folks made good on their "cold dead hands" promises. In the event of mass confiscation the best i would expect from the public at large would be non-cooperation or passive resistance. There wouldnt have to be thousands of arrests. Frankly i dont think you will find thousands of people WILLING to go to prison for this. Hopefully we will never have to find out.